|Wesley R. Elsberry
Joined: May 2002
Salvador T. Cordova wrote:
Do you believe genetically engineered products evidence CSI by Dembski's definition?
I have no need to believe that anything evidences CSI by Dembski's definition. The reason that I need not believe any such thing is that there has never been a successful application of Dembski's EF/DI via the GCEA meeting or exceeding the "universal small probability" of any event whatsoever. If you had a citation of such a published successful, fully worked-out calculation, I'm sure that you would share that with us.
Until then, it's all just blowin' smoke.
Here is a case were potentially non-algorithmically compressible information is CSI. This would refute your paper's claim that Dembski confuses what you call SAI and CSI.
I have no recollection of saying that Dembski confuses SAI with anything else. That would hardly be sporting, since "SAI" as a term was introduced in that paper. Perhaps a specific citation of the purported faulty language would be appropriate?
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker